Winter 1998

QEDNEWSVisit our Website at www.asq.org/about/divtech/ed/

MissionStatement

To facilitate the

identification,

communication, and

promotion of the use

of quality principles,

concepts, and

technologies for

continuous

improvement in all

aspects of education.

In this issue Vol V, No. 1

Chair’s messageDivision Chair, Henry Lindborg, describes the recent Michigan Governor’sConference on Quality in Education ............................................................. 2

Book ReviewDeborah Hopen reviews the Mike Schmooker’s book, Results: The Key toContinuous School Improvement ..................................................................... 3

TC176 prepares to issue guidelines for trainingAn excerpt from the October 15th issue of The Informed Outlook outlinesthe contents of the draft of ISO/DIS 10015, Quality Management — Guide-lines for Training ............................................................................................. 4

View from the trenchesJerry Brong proposes a radical idea about educational reform—Let theeducators do it ................................................................................................. 8

My point is…Franklin Schargel questions whether our educational systems are as bad asthey seem........................................................................................................ 10

Improving participation in a team environmentThomas Nelson provides some tips on how to improve team memberparticipation .................................................................................................. 12

Hot linksInteresting websites for information about education and training .......... 13

Officers/leaders directoryContact information for 1997-98 division officers and other leaders ....... 14

Special offer!How to order a copy of the new Z1.11 standard at a discount fordivision members only .................................................................................. 15

QEDNEWS Winter 1998

2

QEDNEWS is published three times ayear for the members of the AmericanSociety for Quality’s Education division.

The deadline for the Spring 1998 issueis March 15 , 1998. Authors wishing tosubmit articles for publication inQEDNEWS may send them in any wordprocessing format on a PC or Macin-tosh diskette or by e-mail to LauraGregg, 10445 NE 15th St, Bellevue, WA98004, e-mail: laura.gregg@attws.com.Articles should be no longer than 1200words. We are especially pleased to re-ceive book reviews, essays on the topicof standards and assessment in educa-tion, and how-to articles describing theuse of quality tools and principles ineducation and training institutions.

Chair’s message

by Henry Lindborg

The Michigan Governor’s Con-ference on Quality in Education wasfor me an exciting reaffirmation ofthe importance of both ourDivision’s mission and its commit-ment to collaboration. I was forciblystruck by the range, sophistication,and learning orientation of the pre-sentations. Preaching to educators isout. Exploration of issues and actionlearning are in. The conference pro-vided a forum for peers to sharewhat they have learned in such areasas classroom applications, customersurvey, strategic planning, partner-ship development, and systemsthinking. As I attended sessions on

these topics, I was reminded thatour Division’s success dependsupon fostering a community oflearners to improve the communi-ties in which we live.

Two dramatic examples of com-munity-based collaborations pre-sented at the conference are theHenry Ford Academy, whose formaldedication conference participantshad the opportunity to attend, andthe Celebration schools. Both arepublic schools developed throughcollaboration of school districts,American corporations (Ford Mo-tor Company, Disney), and educa-tional institutions. The Henry FordAcademy is housed on the groundsof the Henry Ford Museum andGreenfield Village in Dearborn; theCelebration schools are located inCelebration, Florida. Both have de-veloped mechanisms for dissemina-tion of exemplary practices. AtCelebration, sharing will take placethrough the Celebration TeachingAcademy, involving Disney, StetsonUniversity, and the National Educa-tion Association. In serving theirstudents, both schools will enhanceour body of knowledge about schoolimprovement.

In serving our members andstakeholders, our Division also en-hances the body of knowledge and

contributes to communities. OurVICA partnership and support ofKoalaty Kid have been developedwith these aims in mind, as has ourpromulgation of the Z1.11 standard.Craig Johnson’s pre-conferencetutorial on the standard was wellreceived, and it is becoming increas-ingly clear that our Division’s ex-pertise in standards is highly valuedby educators. (As well, I might add,as by ASQ itself. The Society’s na-tional Education and TrainingBoard is looking to the standard forguidance in improving its opera-tions.) During the conference weexplored key issues related to educa-tional standards and assessmentthrough focus groups conducted byLaura Gregg and Jerry Brong. Re-sults from these and future groupswill help us make better connectionswith educators, as will ongoing net-working with other organizations.The Division was asked to presentwith the Association for Quality andParticipation and the AmericanAssociation of School Administra-tors’ Quality Network in a sessioncalled “Collaborating Nationally toConnect Locally.” There we lis-tened to educators voice their needsfor support in advancing system-wide quality for improved commu-nities. Bob Kattman, Chair Elect,and I will be following up on thissession to look for areas of possiblecollaboration in serving communityneeds.

It is my hope that the Divisionwill continue to have a significant

QEDNEWSWinter 1998

3

presence at the annual Governor’sConference on Quality in Educa-tion, sharing our vision and sup-porting educators in their work. Forthis conference, special thanks aredue Governor John Engler; LindaBorsum and Chet Franke, Confer-ence Cochairs and advocates of thisDivision; Conference Partners, theMichigan Quality Council and ASQ;and Sponsor, Ford Motor Company.

Book Review

by Deborah Hopen

Mike Schmooker, Results: The Keyto Continuous School Improvement

Published in 1996 by the Associationfor Supervision and Curriculum Devel-opment (703-549-9110), ISBN 0-87120-260-3

This is a short but powerful bookthat addresses the frequent issue ofhow to balance process and results.Discussion focuses on three criticalareas that schools need to addressmore effectively: teamwork, goals,and performance data. The authoradmonishes educators that “Ourconcern with politics has caused usto overlook the most obvious on-the-ground concerns about our realpurposes—our goals. We havelaunched initiatives,… providedloads of staff development in certain

methods,… and spent untold hoursdrawing up visions and missionstatements. All had enormouspromise. But these symbolic, high-profile ‘initiatives du jour’occurred in the near absence of anywritten or explicit intention tomonitor, adjust, and thus palpablyincrease student learning orachievement.”

In the first chapter, Schmookerdescribes the traditions and organi-zational structures that promoteteacher isolation rather than team-work. Unlike many opponents fromthe business world who accuseteachers of avoiding teamwork sothat they can perpetuate their per-sonal domains in the classroom, hepresents the view of an insider whoacknowledges that staff meetings donot offer viable opportunities forcollaboration. Fundamentally, theeducation system is designed in away that thwarts teamwork, causingteachers to consciously and uncon-sciously work towards individualgoals within the limitations of theirpersonal knowledge and skills. Hedescribes the benefits of team ap-proaches and why they are not be-coming more commonplace inschools, which he ascribes to thefailure to collect appropriate datathat demonstrates positive results.

Subsequent chapters dig intogoal-setting and data collection andanalysis issues. The discussion rein-forces the need to move from“fluff” to substance, relying onmeasurable goals and high-impactparameters. Schmooker honestlydeals with the fear of failure, ac-knowledging that the public doesnot encourage continuous learningfor its educators; they are expectedto succeed instantly in every cir-cumstance. No wonder teachers arereluctant to try new approacheseven if they seem quite promising!

Results compiles much relevantresearch to support its premises, sofew will consider its contents earth-shaking. On the other hand, it iswritten in an easy to read and un-derstand style that encouragesschool staff to embrace the prin-ciples and practices of continuousimprovement. For an investment oftwo hours, teachers and administra-tors can learn how to start the changeprocess, and this paperback primercan guide them along the way.

“Anyone who has passedthrough the regular grada-tions of a classical education,and is not made a fool by it,may consider himself ashaving had a very narrowescape.”

William Hazlitt

QEDNEWS Winter 1998

4

TC 176 prepares to issueguidelines for training

Closing the competence gap forISO 9001/2/3 using ISO 10015

The following is excerpted from an articleby Jim Mroz that appeared in the Octo-ber 15th issue of The Informed Outlook.

ISO 9001 Clause 4.18, Training, isone area where many companieseither have what is required or needa great deal of help in satisfying akey quality requirement—closing thecompetence gap in human resources.A first draft of ISO/DIS 10015,Quality Management — Guidelinesfor Training is now ready for ballot-ing. This step will bring closer topublication a standard designed “toprovide guidance which can help anorganization to identify and analyzethe training needs, design and planthe training, provide for the train-ing, evaluate training outcomes,monitor and improve the trainingprocess, in order to achieve its ob-jectives,” according to ISO/DIS10015.

Craig Johnson, Professor Emeri-tus at Florida State University, is theUS TAG’s Lead Expert for trainingand education as well as the stan-dards representative for the ASQEducation Division. He said thatISO/DIS 10015 offers an effectiveexplanation of its purpose when itstates:

“This International Standardprovides guidelines to assist organi-zations and their personnel when

bility of training providers eitherwithin a company or from an exter-nal organization.

Johnson explained, “Severalcountries have guideline standardsfor these training providers. The USnational standard was published inJanuary 1997 as ANSI/ASQC Z1.11:Quality Assurance Standards—Guidelines for the Application ofANSI/ASQC Q9001 or Q9002 toEducation and Training Institu-tions. The international guidelinesin ISO 10015 and the nationalguidelines in Z1.11 can improvecommunications between a com-pany with training needs and atraining provider.”

“ISO/DIS 10015 does not pro-vide specific training-oriented an-swers to ‘How does my companydo it?’ questions,” Johnson said.“There is considerable literatureand many consultants to providethose types of answers.” ISO/DIS10015 states:

“Customers are likely to valueany organization’s commitment toits human resources and its strategyto improve the competencies of itspersonnel [and] personnel at all lev-els should be trained to meet theorganization’s commitment tosupply products of required quality,in a rapidly changing marketplacewhere customer requirements andexpectations are increasingcontinuously.”

Johnson explained, “A companythat hires people with all the com-

addressing training which includes acommitment to continuous im-provement. This International Stan-dard may be applied wheneverguidance is required to interpret ref-erences to ‘education’ or ‘train-ing’ within the ISO 9000 qualityassurance and quality managementstandards.”

Present expectations are that ISO10015 will not be published until atleast 1999, because the balloting willtake six months and the FDIS pro-cess will take some time. However,if your company is implementing aquality assurance system to satisfyISO 9001/2/3 and/or QS-9000—oreven if you are already registered—ISO 10015 may guide you in ensur-ing the quality of your company’straining and continuing educationprograms once the standard ispublished.

The development ofISO/DIS 10015

Development of ISO/DIS 10015was motivated by the need for com-panies that are registering to ISO9001 to understand what is requiredto meet the requirements of Clause4.18. ISO 10015 is not meant to beused to develop a training program.The training program—the provi-sion of courses, course materialsand examinations—is the responsi-

QEDNEWSWinter 1998

5

petence to meet all specificationshas no competence gap. When addi-tional competence is required andthe process includes training to ac-quire it, then the process should beevaluated in terms of the quality re-quirements to determine if it is‘effective’.”

Some indirect inferences abouteffectiveness measures might bedrawn from annual surveys done intrade publications (e.g., TrainingMagazine) or research done by theUS Department of Labor. RobFoshay, Vice President for Instruc-tional Design and Cognitive Learn-ing at TRO Learning, Inc., and amember of the ASQ working groupfor ANSI/ASQC Z1.11, noted that anumber of sources in the trade presshave commented on the increasedpressure on training departmentsfor accountability, often defined as arequirement by senior managementto demonstrate return on invest-ment (ROI). The performance-based approach outlined in Z1.11guidelines provides one basis forapproaching the ROI question.

“ANSI/ASQC Z1.11 describes aprocess for analysis of performanceimprovement needs and their train-ing components,” explainedFoshay. “It also describes a system-atic process for design, developmentand delivery of training solutions.And—perhaps most critical for acompany implementing ISO 9001—it calls for assessment of thetraining’s effectiveness, not only interms of learning, but in terms of

improved performance. Thus, thestandard makes training a ‘closedloop’ process that begins and endswith the performance measures thatare central to ISO 9000. This allowsthe organization implementing ISO9000 to assure the relevance andcost-effectiveness of the training in-vestment, while leaving to profes-sionals the specification of contentand training method. The standardcan be used to define the role of anycombination of internal and exter-nal training resources in a qualityimprovement process.”

• The clear description and analy-sis of training needs that arisefrom competence gaps

• An appropriate design and planfor the training

• Cooperation between an orga-nization requesting the trainingand its training provider

• Suitable and effective evaluationof training outcomes

• Monitoring of all aspects oftraining.

Individual organizations are en-couraged to ensure these issues arecovered by taking five actions:

1. Identify the competence re-quired and the needs of the per-sonnel to be trained

2. Develop—with the training pro-vider—valid and reliable perfor-mance measures for #1

3. Specify the training approach,methods and outcomes (e.g.,topics, hours, medium, price)

4. Evaluate training effectivenessprimarily by use of the perfor-mance measures developed in #2

5. Integrate training and the ex-pected performance followingthe training

What benefits would a companygain using ISO 10015?

Effectively implemented trainingcan help a company meet its com-mitment to supply products of aspecified quality when the companyidentifies a competence “gap” as aresult of procedures the company

What will ISO 10015 provideonce published?

Once published, ISO 10015 willbe geared to satisfying the needs ofall organizations, including private,public, profit and nonprofit organi-zations. “The needs are genericneeds to close competence gaps bytraining,” said Johnson. “If a gapexists, it may be because specificskills (e.g., the ability to blow glassto narrow specifications) or generaleducation (e.g., report writing skills)are not present in the organization’spersonnel.”

ISO/DIS 10015 focuses on thefollowing five most importantissues:

QEDNEWS Winter 1998

6

follows to satisfy Contract Review(Clause 4.4 of ISO 9001). “A com-petence gap exists when a companyfinds that the human competencerequired to meet customer specifi-cations does not exist within its or-ganization,” noted Johnson.Effective ways of closing this gapinclude hiring new people,outsourcing and training. Whentraining is selected to close the com-petence gap within a company, thenISO 10015 will provide the follow-ing guidance:

• Specific topics and the relation-ship among these topics as aframework for evaluating ap-proaches and methods pro-posed by training providers

• Consensus among quality ex-perts on what should be in-cluded in discussions withtraining providers

• Reasonable expectations thecompany should have as itevaluates training providers(Subclause 4.6.2, Purchasing—Evaluation of Subcontractors, ofISO 9001).

In addition, Foshay and Johnsonidentified a number of specific ben-efits related to use of ISO 10015, in-cluding:

• Greater likelihood that the in-vestment in training will pro-vide the required competenceand lead to improvedperformance

• Fewer quality and cost/scheduleoverrun problems with training

Internal vs. ExternalTraining Resources

Many companies and otherorganizations try to determinewhether they have the in-house capability to provide foremployee training and con-tinuing education or whetherthey need to use outsidetrainers and consultants tomeet their training needs.There are benefits to bothapproaches and the decision isoften based on the organiza-tion and the type of trainingrequired. However, is ISO/DIS10015 intended to provideguidance for training within acompany or for training pro-vided by an outside vendor?

“The simple answer is thatISO/DIS 10015 is written forboth,” explained Johnson.“Whom the organizationselects to close the compe-tence gap is a business deci-sion. The guidelines apply toany decision the companymakes. However, the issue isnot that simple.”

“The unfortunate reality isthat there simply can be nopresumption that either inter-nal nor external trainingfunctions can do the kind of

work specified by ISO/DIS10015—even those whodeliver training relevant toimplementation of ISO 9000for their parent/client compa-nies,” remarked Foshay.

“When I first became inter-ested in quality, I assumed thequality people and the train-ing people within a companyworked together on compe-tence gap problems,” re-called Johnson. “I quicklylearned that the qualityprofessionals within a com-pany usually did not knowanyone in the training depart-ment. On one occasion, Igave a workshop on quality toseveral hundred ‘trainers’ ina major oil company, but itturned out that these trainersdid not train people to pro-duce oil.

“I asked the chief operationsofficer of another major oilcompany how he would fill agap in a competence neededto meet a customer specifica-tion. He replied, ‘Our train-ing people would not knowhow to do that.’ It seems tome that when the vital inter-ests of a company are in-volved, the training depart-ment is not involved, and I

QEDNEWSWinter 1998

7

development projects, whetherinternal or external

• Reduced cost of training deliv-ery/implementation due tomore efficient and effectivedesigns

• Increased ability to demonstrateROI for the training investment

• Improved ability to select andpurchase appropriate qualitytraining services and products.

Steps to developing an effectivetraining program

ISO/DIS 10015 does not addressthe establishment of a training pro-gram. If a company’s quality sys-tem is registered to ISO 9001/2/3, itmust conform to the requirementsof Clause 4.18, Training, of ISO9001 and maintain training records.

Should a company standardizetraining throughout its organiza-tion? “Standardized trainingthroughout an organization makessense in those cases where the per-formance problems—and the ac-countability for solving them—arecentral considerations,” repliedFoshay. Standardized training iscommon in regulated industries andindustries experiencing rapidchange, whether pushed by technol-ogy, the marketplace or other forces.In other cases, it may make sense tostandardize certain training re-sources or specific solutions simplyto gain an economy of scale. In theremaining cases, standardization oftraining and assessment should

don’t know why this is. Onereason may be that there arenot enough people like RobFoshay and Walter Dick,member of the Z1.11 workinggroup, in training departmentswithin companies. FloridaState has a doctoral programand prepares a few graduates,who would be able to trainpeople to fill competencegaps, but they are not typical‘trainers.’

“This issue is relevant forWG 4. We do not want tosuggest that competence gapsshould be addressed by thecompany’s training depart-ment because this departmentmay have low credibility. Nordo we want to suggest thatthe company has to go outsideits organization because wewould appear to be promotingconsultants that may prove nobetter than the internal train-ing department. Therefore, werecommend neither and leaveit up to each company tochoose what will be mosteffective in meeting its trainingneeds.”

“Furthermore, as Craig pointsout, internal training depart-ments and external training

vendors often are not even ina position or role within acompany to play a significantpart in quality assurance,”acknowledged Foshay. “I amamong those who view thissituation as an admission offailure on the part of theemploying companies andthe training professionalsinvolved, whether internal orexternal. But, as Craig says, itdoes mean that we can makeno simple assumption aboutthe role of internal vs. exter-nal trainers—or even trainersvs. nontrainers—in a qualityassurance system. That is whythe language of the guide-lines standard is functionallybased: the critical thing is forsomeone, somehow, to dothe things described.”

“We assume each companywill find someone to close thegap,” remarked Johnson.“We don’t say ‘who’ andwe don’t say ‘how.’ We dosay ‘what’ should be dis-cussed between the organiza-tion and its training providerto increase the possibility ofsuccessful training results.”

QEDNEWS Winter 1998

8

probably be concentrated on meth-odology and “best practices,”rather than specific training pro-grams.

Foshay identified defining andmeasuring the competence to be ac-quired by employees as the mostdifficult part of establishing an ef-fective training program. “In com-panies that have applied ISO 9001/2/3, it’s likely that meaningfulmeasures of performance have beencreated and implemented for eachkey stage in the company’s busi-ness processes. If this is the case, theperformance measures are a majorstep forward in establishing effectivetraining.”

Is the same type of training ap-propriate for all organizations?“Nearly all performance improve-ment needs are best solved by anintegrated intervention that in-cludes some combination of strate-gies, only one of which is training,”commented Foshay. “Nearly alltraining needs are best met by somecombination of training and perfor-mance support strategies, which inturn may be supported by a combi-nation of training media/modessuch as classroom training, hands-on experiential training, demonstra-tions, computer/video/booklearning and teamwork mentoringand apprenticeships.”

View from the trenches

A radical idea about educationalreform—Let the educators do it

by Gerald R. Brong

Most educators have knowledgeabout human learning, teachingtechniques, and curricular designprocesses. Most educators areskilled, trained, and have a compre-hensive education so important inmodern society. Educators can anddo deliver results, guide necessaryreforms, identify goals for learners,assess results, evaluate programs,and today’s educators can play akey role in continuousimprovement.

Radical as it may sound to some“reformers,” educators can pro-vide top-quality systems of educa-tion delivering to stakeholderssubstantial returns on investments.

There are three issues to consider.First, deciding what is to be learnedand by whom. Second, diversity inour systems of education needs tobe accepted as a part of the educa-tion establishment. Included amongthe diverse systems of education arecharter schools, home schooling,self-directed independent learning,private for-profit educational ser-vice organizations, and traditionalpublic and private schools. Third,accepting continuous assessment,especially self-assessment, as a strat-egy for delivering quality results isessential. If continuous assessment

Foshay recommended: “Perhapsthe best strategy for companies withlimited resources for training is to:

1. Carefully prioritize and selectperformance problems by esti-mating ROI

2. Establish, measure and monitorthe competence related to thespecifications by using internalresources

3. Wherever possible, outsourcedevelopment and delivery oftraining but hold providers ac-countable using the measuresfrom step 2

4. Where outsourcing is not pos-sible, develop and deliver thetraining using internal re-sources”

“In a time of drastic change itis the learners who inherit thefuture. The learned usuallyfind themselves equipped tolive in a world that no longerexists.”

Eric Hoffer

QEDNEWSWinter 1998

9

and evaluation are instituted, stu-dent competency examinations andtraditional accreditation may beused to confirm in-process assess-ment and, should it be necessary,allow comparisons between institu-tions and programs.

Our emphasis in this View fromthe Trenches is on continuous in-process assessment, the third issue.

Deciding essential learnings, thefirst issue, is a process very impor-tant to stakeholders served by thesystems of education. Persons notaccepting the diversity in our sys-tems of education, the second issue,are out of touch with reality. Mul-tiple systems exist, they compete forstudents, educational funding is be-ing split more ways, and successesare being demonstrated by newplayers. Diversity in the systems ofeducation and politics and processesof standards will be explored in fu-ture Views from the Trenches.

Our attention here is on assess-ment and continuous improvement.Giving educators a primary respon-sibility for reform is recommendedonly if the educational establish-ment uses tested and proven qualitysystems. One such system is theQuality Performance Evaluation.The QPE is based on the MalcolmBaldrige National Quality Award.The award process is proven to besuccessful. And the Baldrige awardprocesses are being adapted to sys-tems of education.

Second, everyone working to de-liver results in a system of educationdoes strategic planning. Levels ofplanning vary depending on tasksperformed. Planning responsibilitiesare dynamic and will change asneeds change. Planning is depen-dent on applicable knowledge ofwhat customers and stakeholdersexpect and need.

Focusing on results serving cus-tomers is the third strategic area.Customers are external to the sys-tem (parents, employers, and oth-ers) as well as internal (teachersserved by administrators, learningresources specialists served by man-agers of central collections, lunch-room staff served by the warehouse,and so on). And of course, there isthe student for whom the systemwas established.

During planning and operationthe system needs data and informa-tion and results from analysis of thatinformation. The fourth strategicarea is a hub around which all op-erations work. Informationallows for decisions to be madeabout uses of assets, human re-sources, and processes making de-sired results possible.

The fifth strategic area is humanresources development and manage-ment. Three areas are important:people doing work delivering re-sults; continuous education, train-ing, and development of personnel;and the well-being and satisfactionof all employees. When the people

Continuous quality improvementin the delivery of learning supportservices can be structured aroundBaldrige award criteria. Processesare not burdensome. Processes arenot imposed by outside authorities.The QPE becomes a part of normalroutines. The Quality PerformanceEvaluation delivers a systemic as-sessment and feedback process al-lowing directly involved persons tomake strategic decisions. Everyoneshares in assessment and every as-sessment is focused on organiza-tional results. Continuousimprovement happens. Based onten years of successes in govern-ment, manufacturing, health care,and education, the QPE approachhas been embraced by line workersto policy setters because they dis-covered it works.

Educators managing their ownQPE work in seven strategic areas.These areas are basic to the Baldrigeaward process.

First is leadership. Systems ofeducation are complex systems.Leadership is shared and includesmuch more than management andadministration. Systems of leader-ship and decision making lead intothe second strategic area.

QEDNEWS Winter 1998

10

My point is…

“If they give us the blame, canwe take the credit?”

by Franklin P. Schargel

“Our Nation is at risk. Our onceunchallenged preeminence in com-merce, industry, science, and techno-logical innovation is being overtakenby competitors throughout theworld…the educational foundations ofour society are presently being erodedby a rising tide of mediocrity thatthreatens our very future as a Nationand a people. What was unimagin-able a generation ago has begun tooccur—theirs are matching and sur-passing our educational attainments.

If an unfriendly foreign power hadattempted to impose on America themediocre educational performancethat exists today, we might well haveviewed it as an act of war…. We haveeven squandered the gains in studentachievement made in the wake of theSputnik challenge. Moreover, we havedismantled essential support systemswhich helped make those gains pos-sible. We have, in effect, been com-mitting an act of unthinking,unilateral educational disarmament.

Our society and its educational in-stitutions seem to have lost sight ofthe basic purposes of schooling, and ofthe high expectations and disciplinedeffort needed to attain them.”

So begins A Nation At Risk: TheImperative for Education Reform, a

are involved, trained, and workingon accepted goals, the sixth strategicarea can be seen in its relationshipto all seven of the areas.

Managing the processes of thesystem of education is the sixth stra-tegic area. Management allowspeople to plan, do, assess results,and evaluate results. Management,like QPE, is a continuous process.Management removes obstacles anddelivers resources. Quality Perfor-mance Evaluation happens. Man-agement builds continuousimprovement with levels of qualitymeeting, and possibly exceeding,expectations.

Teaching, learning, building re-pair and maintenance, purchasingtextbooks, organizing library collec-tions, providing school nursingcare, paying salaries, allowing con-tinuing education for workers in thesystem, and meeting legal require-ments have people active in the sev-enth strategic area, the measuringand analyzing of results. This sev-enth area provides information foruse in all other areas.

Area four (data analysis) relatesto area three (customers). Area two(planning) relates to area seven(measuring and analyzing results).The Quality Performance Evalua-tion has strength like a stone archwhere the strength of the archcomes from each stone supportingits weight. All stones are necessaryin the arch. The QPE archway al-lows entry into the quality arena.

Quality in education is more im-portant than reform. Reform im-plies failure and sudden change.Continuous improvement in oursystems of education has been, stillis, and always will be, necessary.Many things now in place workwell.

Successes in today’s systems ofeducation exist. Results have beenconfirmed. Continuous improve-ment is always necessary. As a re-sult, the most radical idea may be toallow educators to be key players inthe assessment and reform move-ment. And as opportunities for thefuture are considered, traditionalevaluation and accreditation will bechallenged. Radical, yes. Productive,you bet. Why not give it a try?Delivering quality is a way of life.

Jerry invites your response to this article.You can reach him by telephone at509-962-8238 or by e-mail atgmbp@ellensburg.com.

“Teaching is not a lost art,but the regard for it is a losttradition.”

Jacques Barzun

QEDNEWSWinter 1998

11

national study undertaken at therequest of T. H. Bell, the Secretaryof Education in the Eisenhower Ad-ministration. Issued in April 1983, itserved as a clarion call to the nationto reform our nation’s schools. Italso placed the failure of oureconomy, the nation’s space pro-gram, and invention firmly on thefootsteps of our schools. Now thatthe economy is doing well; now thatthe stock market is at all-time high,can the schools take the credit?

This question is one of manyasked and answered annually byGerald W. Bracey, a research psy-chologist and writer, in Kappan, apublication of Phi Delta Kappa. Mr.Bracey’s latest article entitled “ TheSeventh Bracey Report on the Condi-tion of Public Education” appearedin October 1977. Mr. Braceypointed out that the United Statesscored better on the TIMSS (ThirdInternational Mathematics and Sci-ence Study) as well as other testscores:

• The American College Test(ACT) scores rose for the thirdyear in a row.

• The NAEP mathematics scoresrose for the third assessment ina row.

• From 1981 to 1995, the propor-tion of students scoring above650 [on the SAT mathematicssection] grew by almost 75%,from 7.1% to 12.1%.

Mr. Bracey and others are correctin pointing out the flawed logic of ablanket condemnation of ourschools. David Berliner and BruceBiddle, in The Manufactured Crisis(Addison-Wesley, 1995) point outthat a number of statistics used tocondemn public schools are untrue.Mr. Berliner and Mr. Biddle believethat Americans are “being misledabout schools and their accomplish-ments” and that “powerfulpeople…were pursing a politicalagenda designed to weaken thenation’s public schools, redistrib-ute support for those schools so thatprivileged students are favored overneedy students or even abolish thoseschools altogether.” (p. xii)

We need to acknowledge whenour schools are doing well. Howevermost districts do not have a system-atic approach to improvement, auniform deployment or a measuredevaluation of increased, improvingresults. Our students can go from anexcellent 2nd grade classroom to afair 3rd grade class on the other sideof the hall. Students, in the samedistrict, attend different middleschools where there are widely vary-ing results.

One of Dr. Deming’s greatestcontributions was his emphasis onsystemic change. Until we use sys-tematic procedures to drive thechange process we will have hills ofsuccess and valleys of failure. And asa nation, we can never achieve glo-bally education success.

Mr. Schargel is interested in knowingyour reaction to this article. He can bereached at franklin@schargel.com orwww.schargel.com.

Quality Counts ‘98

The January 8, 1998 edition ofEducation Week on the Web reportson the progress — or lack of it —toward education reform in the50 states during the past year.

Quality Counts ’98 also includesthe first evaluation of how statestandards in English and mathemat-ics compare with national standards.

Iowa is now the only state that isnot developing statewide standardsfor what students should know andbe able to do. But the rigor of statestandards varies widely.

To read the complete report, withstate-by-state “report cards,” pointyour browser at www.edweek.org/sreports/qc98. If you do not haveaccess to the Web, call 1-800-346-1834 to order a hard copy of thereport. The cost is $10.00 and quan-tity discounts are available.

QEDNEWS Winter 1998

12

Improving Participationon a Team Environment

by Timothy G. Wiedman

Thomas NelsonCommunity College

As a TQM trainer and facilitatorsince 1991, I am strongly committedto the team approach to continuousimprovement. Yet even when usinga trained, crossfunctional team (onethat seemingly possessed the“mix” of technical skills requiredto solve the problem at hand), I be-gan to wonder why some teamswere so much more successful thanothers at developing workable, per-manent solutions.

I now believe that the differencebetween success and failure oftenlies in the “quality” of the partici-pation that occurs within the group.If the team is not able to take advan-tage of the collective wisdom thatthe group possesses, the outcomesmay well be suboptimal.

I believe that each individual’snatural (inborn) tendencies to con-tribute in a group setting will have amajor impact on the success of theteam. And while people can be en-couraged to participate, their “so-ciability” patterns (especially formales) seem to be largely deter-mined in early childhood (Schaefferand Bayley, 1963). Thus, “intro-verted” group members may find itdifficult to contribute—even when

they have good ideas and are beingencouraged to voice them.

The introvert/extrovert concepthas its origins in the work of CarlJung. He felt that introverts, whilenonsocial, also tended to be imagi-native, reflective, and interested inideas. Extroverts, on the other hand,were likely to be sociable, confident,and outgoing, yet “often ventureforth with careless confidence intounknown situations” (Jung, 1966).

In more-recent research byHayslip and Panek (1989), extro-verts were found to be active andassertive, while exhibiting positiveemotions. And that combinationoften makes them the driving forcebehind the group process (sponta-neous, take-charge members of thegroup can be vital in getting theteam organized and moving).

On the other hand (as Jung de-scribed above), extroverts may alsoconfidently charge off into the un-known; and that is a tendency thatneeds to be tempered lest the groupwaste time and resources chasingunproductive solutions. Here iswhere the introverts on the teamcan often make a criticalcontribution.

The introverts’ reflective, scruti-nizing tendencies (Jung, 1966) can

serve to counterbalance the sponta-neity of the extroverts. Further,studies have shown that introvertsare better than extroverts at tasksrequiring sustained attention(Harkins and Green, 1975). Thus,while the extroverts may be vital ingetting the project under way, theintroverts may well be the force thatsustains the team when it encoun-ters tedious aspects of a longproject.

So getting participation fromboth types of personalities can bevital to the success of the team.However, assuming that you have amix of introverts and extroverts onyour team, how can you ensure theparticipation of the quiet, generallyreserved introverts (Hergenhahn,1990)?

When faced with the need toequalize participation among groupmembers in brainstorming, prob-lem-solving, or decision-makingsituations, I often recommend amethod called Nominal GroupTechnique (Scholtes, 1993).

In using Nominal Group Tech-nique (or NGT), each group mem-ber silently brainstorms (withoutinteraction) and writes down indi-vidual ideas that relate to the prob-lem at hand. Next, group membersread one item at a time off of theirindividual lists (in a round-robinmanner), and the ideas are recordedon a flip chart or white board for allto see. This process continues untilall ideas have been recorded. No

QEDNEWSWinter 1998

13

discussion is allowed during therecording phase. Next, after the re-cording is finished, members areallowed to ask for clarification con-cerning individual ideas. Once allmembers are satisfied that they un-derstand everything on the list, teammembers cast secret ballots whichare tallied to determine the senti-ments of the group (see Scholtes,1993, for more details on the votingprocedure).

NGT largely takes personalitiesout of the brainstorming processsince individual lists of ideas aregenerated without interaction. Andonce each participant has a list ofideas, reading one item at a time tothe recorder seems to work quitewell (even when shy introverts areinvolved). Thus, this method seemsto equalize the level of participationbetween introverts and extroverts.Finally, the secret ballot ensures thata dominant personality cannot talkthe group into a course of actionnot supported by the majority.Thus, each team member (whetheran introvert or an extrovert) has arelatively equal say in the team’scourse of action.

This method is not fool-proof;but in my experience, it is an excel-lent way to generate increased par-ticipation from the introverts in ateam setting. And that participationmay well produce valuable ideasthat are now going to waste.

References

Harkins, S., & Green, R. G. (1975).Discriminability and Criterion Differ-ences Between Extraverts and IntrovertsDuring Vigilance. Journal of Research inPersonality, 9, 335–340.

Hayslip, B., & Panek, P. E. (1989).Adult Development and Aging. NewYork: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.

Hergenhahn, B. R. (1990). An Intro-duction to Theories of Personalities.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,Inc.

Jung, C. G. (1966). The CollectedWorks of C.G. Jung. Princeton:Princeton University Press.

Schaeffer, W. W., & Bayley, N.(1963). Maternal Behavior, Child Be-havior and Their Interdependence fromInfancy Through Adolescence. Mono-graphs of the Society for Research inChild Development, 28, 1–127.

Scholtes, P. R. (1993). The TeamHandbook. Madison, WI: Joiner Associ-ates Inc.

Professor Wiedman invites your responseto this article. You can reach him byphone at 757-825-2737 or by e-mail atwiedman@tncc.cc.va.us.

Hot links

A short list of interestingand useful Websites related to

education and training.

www.funderstanding.comHere you will find summaries of

different learning theories with eachone’s implications for curriculumdevelopment and learner evaluation.

wastenot.gov/cted/index.htmlThis is the home page for the

Clearinghouse for Training, Educa-tion and Development. From thispage there is a link to:

www.osti.gov/html/techstds/standards/standard.html

Here you will find severaldownloadable and printable DOE-Approved Guides to Good Practicesrelating to training and education.To do this you’ll need AcrobatReader, also downloadable at thissite, free of charge.

www.astd.org/astd.htmThis is the website for the Ameri-

can Society for Training and Devel-opment. The organization’straining focus is often of interest toquality professionals.

www.iso.ch/welcome.htmlThis ISO 9000 Forum site has ex-

cellent information on ISO 9000certification.

Correction: The last issue included amistyped URL for the Transformation ofLearning document. The correct URL isiitfcat.nist.gov:94/doc/education.html.

QEDNEWS Winter 1998

14

1997-98 officers andother leaders

ChairHenry LindborgNational Institute for QualityImprovement17 Forest AvenueFond du Lac, WI 54935Work: 920-923-9600Home: 920-922-8403Fax: 920-921-8228E-mail: niqi@aol.com

Chair ElectRobert KattmanGlendale-River Hills Schools2600 W Mill RdGlendale, WI 53209Work: 414-351-7170Home: 414-962-9047Fax: 414-351-7187E-mail: rkattman@execpc.com

SecretaryLaura GreggWizard Textware10445 NE 15th StreetBellevue, WA 98004Work: 425-803-1259Home: 425-453-7210Fax: 425-453-7352E-mail: laura.gregg@attws.com

TreasurerRashpal AhluwaliaWest Virginia UniversityIndustrial Engineering DeptMorgantown, WV 26506Work: 304-293-4607 x706Home: 304-599-4722Fax: 304-293-4970E-mail: ahluwalia@cemr.wvu.edu

Vice Chair—Higher EducationMargaret LandTexas A&M KingsvilleCampus Box 172Kingsville, TX 78363Work: 512-593-2235Home: 512-595-1588Fax: 512-593-3409E-mail: mland@tamuk.edu

Vice Chair—Business,Industry, ConsultingJohn Zavacki2378 SR 345 NENew Lexington, OH 43764Work: 614-342-3523 x338Mobile: 740-653-3164Fax: 614-342-2062E-mail: j.zavacki@ittauto.com

AQC Technical SessionGerald BrongGMB Associates4530 Manastash RdEllensburg, WA 98926Work/Home: 509-962-8238Fax: 509-925-4566E-mail: gmbp@ellensburg.com

National Educational QualityInitiativeFrank CaplanQuality Sciences Consultants22531 SE 42nd CtIssaquah, WA 98029Home: 425-392-4006Fax: 425-392-2621E-mail: fcaplan@serv.net

Koalaty Kid LiaisonGordon Constable7436 Eagle Creek DrCenterville, OH 45459Work: 937-885-2255Home: 937-433-6750Fax: 937-873-3545E-mail: gconstab@discover.wright.edu

Chair—Vocational EducationMarshall GartenlaubFullerton College1574 Rancho Hills DriveChino Hills, CA 91709Work: 714-695-1501x212Home: 909-606-0909Fax: 909-606-1496E-mail: marshall@wavenet.com

Membership ChairRajinder Kapur179 Pheasant RunTroy, MI 48098Work: 810-296-0200Fax: 810-296-0936

Immediate Past ChairGreg HutchinsQuality Process Engineering4052 NE CouchPortland, OR 97232Work: 503-233-1012Home: 503-233-1012Fax: 503-233-1410

QEDNEWSWinter 1998

15

Priority Code QP2A4A7

Ship to: (UPS cannot ship to P.O. boxes.) Please print.

ASQ Member Number ___________________________

Name (Last) _____________________________ (First) ____________________

Company __________________________________________________________

Title _______________________________________________________________

Street ______________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip _______________________________________________________

Province/Country ________________ Telephone ( ) ________________

Purchase order number ___________________ Make checks payable to ASQ.Payments sent to ASQ must be in U.S. dollars and drawn on a U.S. financial institution. Noforeign purchase orders.

Credit Card Information ___MasterCard ___Visa ___American Express

Account Number ____________________________________________________

Expiration Date ____________________

Cardholder name ___________________ Signature _______________________(please print) (required for credit card orders)

Address ____________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip _______________________________________________________

CALL toll free 800-248-1946 to place your order.

FAX the order form to: ASQ at 414-272-1734.

MAIL to: ASQ, P.O. Box 3066, Milwaukee, WI 53201-3066.

Shipping and processing

SUBTOTAL

Customers outside the U.S. andCanada add 25% of subtotal

Canadian residents add 7% ofadjusted total for Canadian

goods and services tax

Wisconsin residents add 5% ofadjusted total for sales tax

Milwaukee County residentsadd an additional 0.6% of

adjusted total

TOTAL

Allow one to two weeksfor delivery in the U.S.and Canada.

Shipping and Processing

Order U.S. CanadianAmount Charges Charges

Up to $34.99 $ 4.00 $ 9.00$35.00-99.99 $ 6.25 $11.25$100.00 and over $12.50 $17.50

If shipping and processing charges exceed$12.50 ($17.50 Canadian), ASQ will billcustomer for the additional expense.

ORDER FORMItem # Quantity Title Item Price Total Price

T74 ANSI/ASQC Z1.11—Guidelines for the Application $15.00of Q9001 or Q9002 to Education and Training (special discount)

Special Offer for Division Members!ANSI/ASQC Z1.11

Quality Assurance Standards—Guidelines for the Application of ANSI/ISO/ASQC Q9001 or Q9002 to Education and TrainingInstitutions. This standard guides education and training institutions when using ANSI/ISO/ASQC Q9001 or Q9002. It coversinstructional design, development, instruction delivery, assessment of students and support services. It also contains the full textof ANSI/ISO/ASQC Q9001-1994.

Order yours for the special ASQ Education division members only price of 50% off the list price plus shipping and process-ing. To receive this special “Members Only” discount, please use priority code QP2A4A7 when placing your order.

Need large quantities? Call or e-mail Rob Platt (800-248-1946, rplatt@asq.org) for information on how to obtain permissionto photocopy the standard for distribution in your organization.

ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED

Time dated materialPlease do not delay

EDUCATION DIVISIONAmerican Society for Quality611 E Wisconsin AvenueP.O. Box 3005Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005

Nonprofit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDPermit

No. 650702Portland, OR